Courts Gulf Nations, Africa for Occupation Forces

France’s sudden invasion of Mali over the weekend was expected to come with a huge surge of international support to jump into the quagmire with them. EU and NATO member nations have indeed endorsed the war, in theory, but most are reluctant to contribute anything more than a bare minimum of “support” forces.

Minister of Parliamentary Relations Alain Vidalies was very public in expressing French government annoyance at European support that they see as a “minimal, with some regrettable absences.”

Western African nations are planning to send some troops, but minimally trained and likely to take months to get up to speed for the occupation France envisions. With no real hope of a huge British and German relief force, France is instead turning to the Gulf looking for allies.

GCC member nations don’t seem likely to contribute meaningful troops either, but French officials are hoping they can con the United Arab Emirates and others into at least throwing some money at the war to defray the cost of an open-ended occupation that French officials are publicly insisting will be quick and easy, but which seems set to be a long, long war.

365468 Responseshttp%3A%2F%2Fnews.antiwar.com%2F2013%2F01%2F15%2Ffrance-irked-by-minimal-european-aid-in-mali-war%2FFrance+Irked+by+%27Minimal%27+European+Aid+in+Mali+War2013-01-16+02%3A26%3A46Jason+Ditzhttp%3A%2F%2Fnews.antiwar.com%2F%3Fp%3D36546 to “France Irked by ‘Minimal’ European Aid in Mali War”

They should ask their favorite sons in the area, the Lebanese Christians and lets see how many will volunteer. LOL.
What is wrong with people these days, they invade a country for no good reason and they think they have a God given right for help? I say let them eat Sh*t.

Fundamentally, none of the other EU Member States see the point of invading Mali and, after Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, nobody believes that a war can be won there, no matter how many troops are thrown at it. France will probably claim victory and leave fairly quickly (as was done in Libya!) but it will undoubtedly tarnish Hollande's reputation.

And what is wrong with leaders who order invasions when they know they don't have enough forces to win a battle, let alone occupy the land. Are they watching too much of their own televised propaganda?

As usual your EU perfection obsession is wrong. Already Belgium and UK are involved, not sure about other EU mambers, but in my country it will be decided in the next 2-3 weeks if we send troops and material in Mali, an absurdity beyond any justification, a total waste of resources and possible lives. And for what? For US-Algerian made "islamist terrorists" who very conveniently were activated to capture hostages on Algerian turf, followed by a totally ilogical assault in force which inevitably caused international victims ergo a good pretext to support the French madness. For the hubris of France, more than willing to play along with the US in reshaping a colonial empire (better to play along than against as they have learnt the hard way in the 90s). Not to mention the criminal operation that blew up Libya and opened the gates for massive instability and delivered large quantities of weapons to anyone who wanted to grab them. The French were the detonator there too, not only Sarkozy or now Hollande, it is also their neocon gang (BHL and other humanitarian war criminals) and corporate interests very tangible, visible from far away, all backed by the official media, totally embedded with the new French imperialism.

Hollande, the new mega dwarf reigning over what was once a great nation, can't afford losing face so it is more probable the situation will escalate. Even more since there is a western consensus to get the colonies back under firm control while fueling the myth of islamist threat by stirring various hornet nests which are present, often due to colonial artificially drawn borders, or can be manufactured (like the AQIM outfit).